SEEKING OR ENCOUNTERING NEWS ON THE WEB:
THE ROLE OF NEED FOR COGNITION AND NEED TO EVALUATE
By
Heysung Lee

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Communication—Master of Arts
2017

ABSTRACT
SEEKING OR ENCOUNTERING NEWS ON THE WEB:
THE ROLE OF NEED FOR COGNITION AND NEED TO EVALUATE
By
Heysung Lee
Previous literature has dealt with news consumption patterns on the web, but not
many attempts have done to clarify individual differences by focusing on a role of personality
variables. This study suggests that high need for cognition will lead digital news consumers
to actively seek out news websites to get political information, whereas low need for
cognition will lead them to passively encounter political news on social media. The results of
the online survey indicate that need for cognition does not predict news consumption on the
web, but only need to evaluate positively correlates to news website usage. Also, both
variables positively correlate to active sharing and commenting on political information in
social media, attention to political news, and political knowledge.

Copyright by
HEYSUNG LEE
2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................................vi
INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1
LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................................3
Previous studies on digital news use…........................................................................3
Active versus passive news consumption....................................................................5
Need for Cognition and the Elaboration Likelihood Model........................................6
Need for Cognition and Need to Evaluate...................................................................8
Hypothesis..................................................................................................................10
METHOD...................................................................................................................................14
Measurement..............................................................................................................14
Media use......................................................................................................14
Social engagement on social media..............................................................14
Need for Cognition.......................................................................................15
Need to Evaluate...........................................................................................15
Motivated reasoning typology......................................................................15
Issue importance...........................................................................................15
Attention.......................................................................................................15
Political knowledge......................................................................................16
RESULTS..................................................................................................................................17
DISCUSSION............................................................................................................................22
CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................25
APPENDIX................................................................................................................................26
BIBLOGRAPHY.......................................................................................................................31

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Social media and news websites use..........................................................................17
Table 2. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use..................................................18
Table 3. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use on social media........................19
Table 4. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use on news website......................19
Table 5. Social media and issue importance............................................................................20

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. A typology of motivated reasoning........................................................................... 9

vi

INTRODUCTION
The internet has emerged as a news source which had been dominated by television and
newspapers (Pew Research Center, 2016). News consumers tend to exhibit different patterns
of selecting media sources due to increased options and easier access to a multitude of
sources. Regarding the shifted media environment, a plethora of studies has explored news
consumption behaviors on new media by applying theoretical frameworks such as uses and
gratifications (Al-Menayes. 2015; Kaye, & Johnson, 2002; Lin, Salwen & Abdulla, 2005) or
selective exposure (Garrett, 2009; Knobloch-Westerwick & Meng, 2009; Stroud, 2008).
Although it has been a prevalent topic in communication, there has been a lack of research
differentiating two paths to access information on the web: why some people are likely to be
active news seekers on news websites and others are likely to be passive news browsers on
social media, especially in terms of obtaining political information.
Presumably, need for cognition, a psychological variable related to differences in
preferences for complex thinking or simple thinking, could be a factor to predict people’s news
selections on the web (Winter & Krämer, 2012). Several studies find that need for cognition is
positively related to web usage requiring cognitive efforts (Amichai-Hamburger, Kaynar, &
Fine, 2007; Kaynar & Amichai-Hamburger, 2008; Tuten, & Bosnjak, 2001) and negatively
related to social media use (Zhong, Hardin, & Sun, 2011). Also, need to evaluate, individuals’
proclivity to judge whether an issue is good or bad, is known to be a predictor of news usage
for political information (Bizer et al. 2004; David, 2011). Further, need for cognition and need
to evaluate have the potential to interact with each other, when deciding access points to online
political information (Nir, 2011).
Given the importance of the topic, the purpose of this paper is to extend our understanding
of digital news usage by checking the influence of need for cognition and need to evaluate.
Firstly, I will examine whether need for cognition or need to evaluate are predictors for

1

seeking out news websites or incidentally encountering newsfeeds from social media.
Secondly, I will investigate based on Nir (2011)’s work on motivated reasoning typology,
whether need for cognition and need to evaluate interact with each other when predicting use
of news websites and social media for news sources.

2

LITERATURE REVIEW
Previous studies on digital news use
The development of laptops and smart phones enables increased access to a bulk of
information on the internet (Pew Research Center, 2016). Nowadays, 84% of American
adults use the internet (Pew Research Center, 2015) and about 38% of Americans consume
news online (Pew Research Center, 2016). Social media and news websites have become the
most popular outlets for online news users (Pew Research Center, 2017), by relaying news
more easily and quickly than other sources.
Using digital media for news helps people to become more politically knowledgeable
citizens. But, there are also some downsides. It can restrain one to a limited viewpoint, which
are called “filter bubbles” (see Pariser, 2011). Also, a different motivational use of the
internet leads to unexpected outcomes, such as an increasing gap of political knowledge
between people who prefer news or entertainment (Prior, 2005).
Interpreting the patterns of media use on the web has been conducted with diverse
theoretical backgrounds. Uses and gratifications theory explains that individuals use media in
accordance to their specific needs (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973). The theory
appropriately illustrates an individual’s motivation to habitually choose different types of
media or media content. For example, Lin, Salwen and Abdulla (2005) find that news
websites serve entertainment, interpersonal communication, information skimming, and
information scanning purposes. Al-Menayes (2015) also examined motives to use social
media by cross-sectional survey. The results show that gratifications expected from social
media are entertainment and information seeking. Notwithstanding, uses and gratifications
has been criticized by its methodological limitations, unsophisticated motives, and a lack of
coherence as a theory (Ruggiero, 2000).

3

Another big branch in research on news consumption is selective exposure. A
growing body of literature on selective exposure has explored how news consumers begin to
have more control on choosing news information based on their pre-existing beliefs.
Festinger’s (1957) cognitive dissonance theory explains how the information selection
process is followed by predispositions with a cognitive mechanism. The basic assumption of
the theory is that people undergo cognitive dissonance when faced with messages which
challenge their existing beliefs. Because dissonance is an unpleasant cognitive state,
individuals are likely to be exposed to messages backing their predispositions over
contradicting their predispositions. Previous literature supports the assumption of selective
exposure in the age of countless media outlets. Stroud (2008) investigates the pattern of
partisan selective exposure across media types, using data from the 2004 National Annenberg
Election Survey and finds that people’s politically biased media choices are consistent across
political talk radio, cable news, and websites. Other studies have evidence that people use
blogs in ways that confirm their party identification (Lawrence, Sides, & Farrell, 2010), and
prefer online news sources with pro-attitudinal messages regardless of topics (KnoblochWesterwick & Meng, 2009).
The selective exposure approach explicates the relationship between new media
landscapes and an individual’s news consumption based on his or her existing beliefs
(Garrett, 2009). However, its scope of media use is relatively limited, because the term
selective exposure has been linked to confirmation bias (Knobloch-Westerwick, 2015). Most
of studies focus on the mechanism of exposure toward political information or news labels in
accordance with political ideologies (Garrett, 2009; Iyengar & Hahn, 2009; Stroud, 2008;
Knobloch-Westerwick & Meng, 2009). To sum up, there is a lack of attempts to provide a
far-reaching picture of general news media use in previous literature, explaining which

4

variable leads people to choose a certain type of new media platform as an information
source.
Active versus passive news consumption
Individuals show different patterns of news usage on the web, because they cannot
consume all of the information available online. Categorizing digital news consumers into
active versus passive users has been discussed by a number of scholars with different terms.
Tewksbury et al. (2001) identify “incidental exposure,” which refers to encountering
unexpected news while looking for other information or doing other activities on the internet.
This implies that online users can either actively seek information or passively encounter
information. Similarly, Erdelez (1999) introduces the notion of “information encountering,”
which is running into information inadvertently while performing unrelated activities. This is
different from information seeking, which denotes the active acquisition of information.
Tewksbury, Hals and Bibart (2008) classify online users into information selectors and
browsers: information selectors focus on specific topics when searching for information, and
information browsers scan a wide range of media issues.
As seen in the previous literature, digital news users can also be divided into active
or passive users. Using news websites or social media for political information can be also
adapted for this categorization. To illustrate, visiting news websites usually requires active,
advertent, and deliberative information seeking procedures. On the contrary, obtaining news
on social media involves passive and inadvertent information encountering procedures.
Further, the two pathways of news consumption behaviors on the web can be explained by
personality traits in order to observe individual differences.

5

Need for Cognition and the Elaboration Likelihood Model
Several studies propose that social media use and internet use can be a function of
personality variables (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2007; Correa, Hinsley, & De Zuniga, 2010;
David, 2011; Hamburger, & Ben-Artzi, 2000). Personality variables are useful when
analyzing users’ distinct choices with regards to the diversity of internet functions, including
social interaction, information seeking, and entertainment (Hamburger, & Ben-Artzi, 2000).
Hughes, Rowe, Batey and Lee (2012) suggest that a narrow personality trait, like need for
cognition (NFC), can predict online users’ information consumption patterns.
Developed by Cacioppo and Petty (1982), need for cognition refers to people’s
tendency to vary in managing cognitive efforts. To illustrate, individuals with low NFC tend
to avoid complex problems and issues requiring cognitive effort. On the other hand,
individuals with high NFC are likely to allocate a large amount of cognitive effort to complex
issues, discourses, and information. Among a wide array of media types, the internet is the
place where we can observe that an individual’s different patterns of news consumption are
caused by a different level of NFC.
Need for cognition explains why people varying in using the news websites or social
media as their news sources. Recent literature focuses on the role of NFC on media use,
especially on the web (Amichai-Hamburger et al., 2007). Tuten and Bosnjak’s (2001) study
shows that NFC is positively related to web usage for current events and news. Zhong et al.
(2011) also find that NFC is negatively related to social media use. Specifically, people with
high NFC access social media less than people with low NFC. Amichai-Hamburger et al.
(2007) test the effect of NFC by randomly assigning web-users into four types of webpages,
which differed in the existence of hyper-links and time pressure. They postulate that high
NFC would lead to use hyper-links more, because hyper-links are the path to access for more
information. Their results support their hypothesis that people with high NFC use more

6

hyper-links and stayed longer on the webpage than people with low NFC. Kaynar and
Amichai-Hamburger (2008) broaden their previous topic and tested whether NFC is related
to usage of professional services (getting information for studies, e-mail for work, real time
message for work, etc) or social services (real time debating or chat, real time messaging with
friends, etc). They find a significant relationship between NFC and use the web for
professional services, though the effected size is not large.
Further, findings in literature dealing with the relationship of NFC and new media
usage are aligned with Petty and Cacioppo’s (1981) elaboration likelihood model (ELM).
ELM explains that there are two pathways of information processing: the central route and
the peripheral route. The central route is the informational path requiring motivation and
ability to think with effort. People who are less engaged in a lack of a cognitive ability take
the peripheral route, relying on emotional cues. People use the peripheral route if information
is less personally relevant and motivated (Martin, 2007).
ELM provides a framework for how online news consumers select different
pathways of getting political news: actively seeking news websites or passively encountering
news on social media. In fact, social media was initially launched as a platform for
connecting interpersonally. Though it can serve a role as distributing news, a major motive to
use social media is to feel connected to other people and maintain relationships (Ellison,
Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Pew Research Center, 2011).
Zhong et al. (2011) argue that people low on NFC would select the peripheral route
using social media, because they value emotional outcomes such as moods and social
relationships rather than cognitively demanding messages. Their findings are consistent with
their intuition in that low NFC people tend to access social media more frequently than high
NFC people.

7

On the other hand, news websites are usually run by established news organizations, like
Fox News, CNN, or New York Times, and writers are well-trained, professional journalists.
News articles provided in those websites are generally longer and more complicated in usage
of their language, so it is natural to say that users who intentionally seek the sites have
motives to click hyper-links, read and understand those news stories. As in AmichaiHamburger et al.’s (2007) findings, people with high NFC are willing to use hyper-links and
read long stories. Thus, it is plausible to posit that news website consumers process
information via the central route.
Need for Cognition and Need to Evaluate
Need to evaluate is another psychological variable that can explain individuals’
differences in news usage. Need to evaluate (Jarvis & Petty, 1996) is a propensity to assess
objects or issues as either good or bad. People with high need to evaluate (NE) are inclined to
hold a myriad of evaluations and attitudes towards a number of issues. On the contrary,
people with low NE have fewer thoughts and attitudes about evaluating certain issues. Bizer
et al. (2004) find that NE predicts behavioral outcomes in the scope of politics: high NE
people are more inclined to engage in political participation, turnout, and seek for news
media than low NE people.
Need for cognition and need to evaluate may not only separately affect news use, but
also work together by labeling people into theoretical categorization. Nir (2011) explicates
the role of NFC and NE in the information seeking process, based on Kunda’s motivated
reasoning theory (1990). Kunda (1990) suggests that motivations are driven by either
accuracy goals or directional goals. An accuracy goal is the desire to reach to a precise
conclusion about a given issue. People who pursue an accuracy goal allot a large amount of
cognitive efforts on reasoning, keenly seek related information, and process information with

8

complex deliberations (Kunda, 1990). Otherwise, people with a directional goal have desire
to retain their own belief, prefer pro-attitudinal information, and refuse counter-attitudinal
information. Nir (2011) proposes that need for cognition is the appropriate operational
definition of an accuracy goal, and need to evaluate is the operational definition of a
directional goal.
Figure 1. A typology of motivated reasoning

SOURCE.—Adapted from Lodge and Taber (2000, 187).
According to Nir (2011), differences of NFC or NE sort individuals into the
categories of motivated reasoning manifested by their specific goals. Initially introduced by
Lodge and Taber (2000), the fourfold typology of motivated reasoning and political
evaluation classifies people into the observable groups. It includes four types of reasoning,
with two goals (directional, accuracy) and their strengths (weak, strong) (see Figure 1).
Lodge and Taber (2000) explains by grouping them as partisan reasoner (strong direction,
weak accuracy goals), intuitive scientist (strong direction, strong accuracy), classical
rationalist (weak direction, strong accuracy), and apathetic (weak direction, weak accuracy).
Nir (2011) suggests that “this typology proposes operational definitions of accuracy and
9

directional goals” (p.506). Testing this typology is worth enough to speculate whether NFC
and NE is functioning together on the current topic.
The purpose of this article is to contribute to the understanding of news consumption
behavior on the web. Inspired by previous literature and elaboration likelihood model, this
paper posits that need for cognition explains individual differences to get to two pathways,
active or passive digital news consumption. Individuals may be motivated to deliberately visit
news websites if their NFC is high. On the other hand, low NFC may lead people to use
social media for news source without strong intentions. This paper also develops predictions
based on Nir (2011)’s typology on NFC and NE. Individuals’ differences in need for
cognition and need to evaluate may manifest news consumption behavior on the web.

Hypothesis
This study focuses on political news usage through news websites or social media,
which has not been investigated thoroughly applying the ELM framework in previous
literature. Generally, news websites are professional and informational in delivering political
news in that they allocate most part of their pages for political updates in the U.S. Social
media is consisted of diverse kinds of information, from interpersonal materials (e.g. daily
life of family or friends), public culture (e.g. comments on TV show or pop star’s recent
events) to political materials. The amount of political information on news websites is larger
than social media. More importantly, if high NFC people tend to select news websites, they
may have more motivations to comprehend and remember information provided by
journalists (i.e. central route). Otherwise, if low NFC people choose social media, they may
not allot enough cognitive recourses to understand information on timeline (i.e. peripheral
route). Thus, the hypotheses are:

10

Hypothesis 1: People high on NFC seek political news from news websites than people
low on NFC.
Hypothesis 2: People low on NFC encounter political news from social media sites than
people high on NFC.
Commenting, sharing, and liking are the ways of creating contents and participating in
issues on social media. These activities on social media, which are often collectively called as
social engagement, has been explored in literature on marketing related to customer
engagement with a brand (Hollebeek, 2011). However, social engagement should not only be
limited to marketing, but also apply to news use. Moreover, those activities are different from
general social media use in that active participation involves more efforts and attentions to
the issue. Social engagement with news, especially on social media, has a potential to be
associated with NFC or NE. High NFC people invest more cognitive efforts on relevant
information more than low NFC people. Also, it is known that people high on NE like to
engage in evaluative thoughts and seek issue-relevant information. Thus, both NFC and NE
are possibly related to social engagement on social media.

Hypothesis 3: High NFC people will participate in social engagement on social media
than low NFC people
Hypothesis 4: High NE people will participate in more social engagement on social
media than low NE people.
Additionally, attention to political news and political knowledge are likely to be related
need for cognition. Because high NFC involves more thinking and cognitive effort, it is
natural to posit that people high on NFC pay more attention to information and obtain more
information than people low on NFC.

11

Hypothesis 5: High NFC people will pay more attention to political news than low NFC
people.
Hypothesis 6: High NFC people will have higher political knowledge than low NFC
people.
The main hypothesis in this paper proposes that NFC and NE would independently
predict active or passive news consumption behavior on the web. However, it is possible two
variables interact each other, as Nir’s (2011) approach on the typology of motivated
reasoning. The typology provides operations by distinguishing into four groups differ in NFC
and NE. Lodge and Taber (2010) suggest that strongly pursuing a goal will result in active
gathering of evidence. To be specific, intuitive scientists (strong direction, strong accuracy)
look for sound evidence to reach to fair conclusion and classical rationalists (weak direction,
strong accuracy) also seek for information without preferences. Apathetic (weak direction,
weak accuracy) have low motivations on both accuracy and directions, so they process
information heuristically. Likewise, the explanations of Lodge and Taber (2010) match well
when explaining active or passive news consumers on the web. However, it is difficult to
postulate digital news consumption behaviors of partisan reasoners because they are assumed
to have high need to evaluate but low need for cognition. They may prefer to stay in their
filter bubbles on social media by blocking or muting disconfirmed opinions, or it is also
possible that their strong motives to evaluate may lead them to visit news websites with
preferred conclusions (e.g. Bizer et al., 2004) despite of their low need for cognition. Thus,
hypothesis about motivated reasoning as following:

Hypothesis 7a: Intuitive scientists and classical rationalists will seek political news on
news websites than Apathetic.

12

Hypothesis 7b: Apathetic will encounter political news on social media than intuitive
scientists and classical rationalists.
Research question 1: Which online media are partisan reasoners likely to use for getting
political news?
Finally, different media use patterns may result in diverged perceptions which is an
important issue in American society. Initially introduced by McCombs and Shaw (1972), the
agenda setting approach argues that news media performs a role as agenda setter, who
emphasize or marginalize certain issues. Following this logic, choosing different media
platforms and the number of media use can lead to varied opinions what is a crucial issue in
the U.S. Thus, another hypothesis arises from this idea:

Hypothesis 8: Individuals’ perceived issue importance will differ by their amount of
news use on news websites and social media.

13

METHOD
The present study uses online survey with 200 undergraduates recruited from the large
Midwestern university. 199 students completed the survey, 75 males (37.7%) and 124
females (62.3%). The respondents’ ages ranged from 18-38, with a mean of 20 years. The
majority of respondents were Caucasian (77.4%), followed by Asian (8.5%), African
American (8%), Hispanic (3.5%), and others (2.5%).

Measurement
Media use. Participants were asked how many times they use TV, newspaper, radio
news, news websites, social media to get information about events, public issues and politics
with seven-point Likert scale (1- Everyday; 7- never). A new measure of social media use is
created based on the scales’ median split. The item consists of two categories: (1) light social
media users (2) heavy social media users.

Social engagement on social media. To delineate individual’s social media use,
detailed items were included in order to measure respondents’ social media activities related
to political news. Referring to Pew Research Center (2016), the frequency of behaviors such
as commenting on political news stories, “liking” political news stories were asked. Scores
were ranged from 1 (Never) to 5 (Every day or almost every day). Questions are (1) Read
political news headlines or short news summaries. (2) Click a link to other websites and read
a political news story. (3) Read other users’ comments on political news stories. (4)
Comment on political news stories (5) Look at a political photo, video, gif, etc. (6) “Like”
political news stories (7) Post links to political news stories by myself (8) Discuss issues in
the political news on the timeline. The reliability of the additive score is α = .82.

14

Need for Cognition. The variable was measured with six items from Lee & Jang
(2010). Participants were asked to answer how whether or not the statement in each item is
characteristic of them or what they believe, in seven-point Likert scale (1- doesn’t describe
me at all; 7- describes me very well). The reliability of the additive scale is α = .76.

Need to Evaluate. The five-point scale of need to evaluate developed by Jarvis &
Petty (1994) was used. Respondents answered how much they agree with each statement (e.g.
I form opinion about everything), according to their beliefs and experiences (1-extremley
uncharacteristic; 5- extremely characteristic). The reliability of the additive scale is α = .67.

Motivated reasoning typology. A new variable was computed based on the NFC
and NE scales’ median splits. It values correspond to the four motivated-reasoning quadrants:
(1) low NFC, low NE, ‘‘apathetic’’; (2) low NFC, high NE, ‘‘partisan reasoner’’; (3) high
NFC, low NE, ‘‘classical rationalist’’; and (4) high NFC, high NE, ‘‘intuitive scientist.’’

Issue importance. According to agenda setting theory, news media are likely to
affect individuals’ perception toward issues in the society by delivering information which
issue is important or not. Issue importance was measured in order to find discrepancy by
different media use patterns. Following Gallup’s (2014) question, it was open-ended question
asking “what is the most important problem facing the U.S.?” Issues are recoded into eight
categories (1) Political issues including election, presidency, and polarization. (2)
Environment. (3) Economics including tax, unemployment, and poverty. (4) Social inequality
including discriminations and minorities. (5) Terrorism and immigration.

(6) Obama care.

(7) Crime issues including gun control. (8) Health issues like diets and diseases.

Attention. How much attention respondents have paid to news about politics were
asked (Price & Zaller, 1993), and answers ranged from a 1 (great deal) to 5 (none).

15

Political knowledge. Carpini and Keeter (1993)’s political knowledge index was
used in order to measure political knowledge. The variable is measured by six questions. Two
questions are open-ended questions: (1) Do you happen to know what job or political office is
now held by Paul Ryan? (2) How much of a majority is required for the U.S. Senate and
House to override a presidential veto? Other questions are multiple choices: (3) Whose
responsibility is it to determine if a law is constitutional or not? Is it the president, the
Congress, or the Supreme Court? (1- the president, 2- the congress, 3- the Supreme Court) (4)
Do you happen to know which party had the most members in the House of Representatives
in Washington before the upcoming election? (1-the Republican Party, 2- the Democratic
Party) (5) Do you happen to know which party had the most members in the House of
Representatives in Washington before the upcoming election? (1-the Republican Party, 2- the
Democratic Party) (6) Would you say that one of the parties is more conservative than the
other at the national level? Which party is more conservative? (1-the Republican Party, 2- the
Democratic Party). The fifth question asking knowledge about election results is dropped
because of its low reliability. The reliability of the combined scale is α = .62.

16

RESULTS
The descriptive data of social media and news websites use are presented in the
Table 1. For the frequency of social media use, 64.3% of respondents said that they visit
social media every day to get political information, followed by more than a week (17.6%),
from once a week to less than once a month (13.5%), and non-users (3.5%). Additionally,
50.8% of respondents indicated that they visit Facebook most frequently, followed by Twitter
(33.7%), Snapchat (5%), Instagram (4.5%), Pinterest (1%), and others (3.5%).
Table 1. Social media and news websites use
Social media use

News websites use

Frequency

N

Percentage

N

Percentage

Never

7

3.5

11

5.5

Less than once a month

6

3.0

12

6.0

Once a month

6

3.0

14

7.0

More than once a month

9

4.5

18

9.0

Once a week

6

3.0

36

18.1

More than once a week

35

17.6

49

24.6

Every day

128

64.3

59

29.6

2

1.1

0

0

199

100

199

100

Missing
Total

The frequency of using news websites for political news show a different pattern that
participants do not use news website habitually as social media. First of all, 29.6% of
respondents indicated that they use news websites everyday as a political news source,
followed by more than a week (24.6%), once a week (18.1%), more than once a month (9%),

17

once a month (7%), less than once a month (6%) and never (5.5%). Also, CNN (41.7%) was
the most popular news website among respondents.
Table 2. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use
Social media
use

News
websites use

Social
engagement

Attention

Political
knowledge

Need for
cognition

.05

.004

.15*

.20*

.34*

Need to
evaluate

.01

.20*

.32*

.39*

.22*

The general expectation of this study is that need for cognition is a potential
contributory factor for digital news media usage. In order to test the hypothesis, the
correlation between media use and NFC was estimated. Table 2 shows the results of
correlations between variables. H1 states that people with people high on NFC use news
websites to get political news on the internet. However, H1 is not supported. NFC is not
significantly related to news websites use, r= - .02, p > .05. Also, H2 predicts that low NFC
people tend to get political news from social media rather than official news websites
voluntarily. The second hypothesis is rejected, the relationship between NFC and social
media use is not significant, r= - .05, p > .05. Results indicate that need to evaluate, not need
for cognition, is significantly related to news website use. People with high NE are likely to
visit news websites for political news than people with low NE, r= .20, p < .05.
H3 and H4 propose that need for cognition and need to evaluate would predict
engagement on social media, regards to political news. Both hypotheses are supported. Social
engagement on social media is positively related to NFC, r= .15, p = < .05. Also, NE is
significantly correlated with social engagement, r= .32, p < .05.
H5 suggests that need for cognition is positively related to attention to political news.
H5 is supported that NFC is positively related with attention to political news, r= .20, p =
18

< .05. Additionally, NE is positively related to attention to political news, r= .39, p < .05. H6
indicates that need for cognition positively correlates to political knowledge. H6 is supported,
because NFC is positively related to political knowledge, r= .23, p < .05. Also, need to
evaluate is marginally related to political knowledge, r= .17, p < .05.
Table 3. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use on social media.
Low NE

High NE

Light user

Low NFC
(n= 53)
28.3%

High NFC
(n= 34)
44.1%

Low NFC
(n= 37)
43.2%

High NFC
(n= 55)
32.7%

Heavy user

71.7%

55.9%

56.8%

67.3%

Total

100%

100%

100%

100%

Note: (χ2 (1, N= 86) =-.13, p>0.05, V= .13) —low NE condition, (χ2 (1, N= 92) =.11, p>0.05,
V= .11) — high NE condition.

Table 4. Need for cognition, need to evaluate, and news use on news websites
Low NE
High NE

Light user

Low NFC
(n= 38)
44.7%

High NFC
(n= 55)
50.9%

Low NFC
(n=53)
43.4%

High NFC
(n=35)
37.1%

Heavy user

55.3%

49.1%

56.6%

62.9%

Total

100%

100%

100%

100%

Note: (χ2 (1, N= 93) =-.06, p>0.05, V= .06). ow NE condition, (χ2 (1, N= 88) =.06, p>0.05,
V= .06) — high NE condition.
The hypothesis 7a, 7b and the first research question concerns whether the data fits
with the typology of motivated reasoning (see Table 3 and 4). However, results showed that
need for cognition and need to evaluate do not interact each other. Individuals’ social media
usage shows no significant difference by four groups: partisan reasoner, intuitive scientist,

19

classical rationalist and apathetic on low need to evaluate condition (χ2 (1, N= 86) =-.16,

p>0.05, V= .16) and high need to evaluate condition (χ2 (1, N= 92) =.11, p>0.05, V= .11).
Also, the fourfold groups do not have any significant differences in visiting news websites on
high need to evaluate condition (χ2 (1, N= 88) =.06, p>0.05, V= .06) and low need to evaluate
condition (χ2 (1, N= 93) =-.06, p>0.05, V= .06).
Table 5. Social media and issue importance
Social media use

Issues

Non-users
(n=7)

Political issues
42.9%
Environment
0%
Economics
28.6%
Social inequality
28.5%
Terrorism/immigration
0%
Obama care
0%
Crime issues
0%
Health issues
0%
Others
0%
Total
100%
Note: (χ2 (16, N= 197) =26.36, p<0.05, V= .26).

Moderate users
(n=21)

Heavy users
(n=169)

33.3%
4.8%
28.6%
4.8%
4.8%
4.7%
0%
0%
19.0%
100%

26.0%
9.5%
26.6%
22.5%
10%
0%
1.2%
1.2%
3.0%
100%

Finally, the H8 inquiries that difference in the amount of media use contribute to
different issue importance. The results of the chi-square test indicate that difference in issue
importance of media use is only found in social media use (see Table 5). Regarding social
media use, heavy users (more than once a week), moderate users (less than once a week), and
non-users (never), show differences in their perceived important topic in America (χ2 (16, N=
197) =26.36, p<0.05, V= .26). A closer inspection of the frequencies show that most nonusers ranked politics, including 2017 election, partisanship, or international politics as the
most important issue facing the U.S. (42.9%). Moderate users point out that politics as the
most paramount problem (33.3%) and economy as the second important (28.6%). Otherwise,

20

heavy users’ opinions were dispersed to politics (26%), social inequality like racial and
sexual discrimination (22.5%) and economy like national debt or unemployment (26.6%).

21

DISCUSSION
As previous literature finds that need for cognition predicts web usage as an information
tool, this paper also tests the relationship between digital news consumption, need for
cognition, and need to evaluate. The results contradicted the main prediction which states that
people high on NFC would seek out news websites whereas people low on NFC would
encounter political news from social media, though we do find other significant relationships.
To illustrate, NFC is positively related to social engagement on social media, attention, and
political knowledge as expected but does not predict news consumption on news websites
and social media. In the following section, I will discuss several intriguing aspects of the
mixed results.
The first interesting finding is that neither need for cognition or need to evaluate are
significantly associated to general social media use. This challenges findings of previous
literature (e.g. Zhong et al., 2011). It is possible there may be an unknown moderating
variable in this relationship, like interest in politics. For example, David’s (2011) study
shows that NFC and NE are positively associated to interest to politics, and interest predicts
exposure to news media. Future studies should expound on finding an accurate relationship
of digital news consumption behaviors by figuring out an appropriate moderator. Also, the
impact of NFC may differ by social media platforms. For example, in the study of Hughes et
al. (2012), need for cognition positively correlates to using Twitter for information and
negatively correlates to using Facebook for information. They suggest the online information
behaviors may not derive from one personality variable, and they can be dissimilar in accords
to types of social media. Thus, future research should take into account characteristics of
different social media platforms and specify online information behaviors.
Secondly, the fourfold framework of need for cognition and need to evaluate by Nir
(2011) is discrepant with the results in this study. Using online media as a political

22

information source does not follow a complicated typology of four groups. In fact, NFC and
NE are separately working with news websites usage and social engagement. Only need to
evaluate predicts news websites use, and NE is a stronger indicator of social engagement than
NFC. Based on the findings, need to evaluate may be more accurate to explain news use on
the web (e.g. Bizer et al., 2004) than NFC. Additionally, borrowing the traditional twofold
explanation by Kunda (1990), it is plausible that digital news use is more strongly driven by
directional goals, not by accuracy goals. This also means that the motivation of news
consumption online is driven by making judgments about certain issues and being evaluative,
rather than obtaining accurate information.
Finally, political knowledge positively correlates with need for cognition and need to
evaluate. NFC and NE explains why people have different levels of political knowledge in a
part. Knowledgeable citizens have propositions to access to more information with cognitive
efforts and like to make a judgment about it. The results also indicate that a gap of political
knowledge can be related to individuals’ motivational difference—in this paper, it is
difference in need for cognition and need to evaluate— as in Prior (2009). However, the
reliability of political knowledge scale is not high enough to strengthen the results. Future
studies may speculate into the influence of this knowledge gap, such as political participation
or out-group bias and ensure to create a scale with high reliability.
Several methodological limitations of this study may add explanation to the failure to
support H1 and H2. Firstly, samples of the study did not reflect the general population in
America. Respondents were college students in the large Midwestern university for extra
credits. As it is known that NFC is positively associated with education, it is plausible that
the variation of NFC was not large enough to see any difference in the postulated
relationship. Also, undergraduates are generally heavy social media users. In fact, 64.3% of

23

respondents answered in the survey that they use social media every day. Thus, this bias in
sample may work against detecting a significant relationship.
Secondly, the 2017 presidential election was conducted during the survey session. A
certain pattern of media consumption behavior can persist during the election term and can
disappear after the event (Stroud, 2008). In order to measure a general media use, future
studies need to be conducted during non-election seasons.
Third, self-reports have some limitations when measuring exposure to information in
that media users are not often fully aware of their own selection motives (KnoblochWesterwick, 2015) and overrate their news exposure following a desirability to look good or
finish a survey quickly (Prior, 2009). Thus, an innate drawback in the methodology of
surveys may partly vitiate to observe the effects of NFC and NE.
Finally, it is possible that individuals have different interpretations of the term “news
websites.” In fact, a small number of people in the survey answered Facebook or Google
when asking which news websites they are likely to visit. A few people also indicated both
news websites and social media sites, like Twitter and CNN, about the same question. This
shows that they do not have clear distinction between news websites and social media and
consider social media a kind of news website. In this sense, future studies should clarify
survey questions when asking about media use.

24

CONCLUSION
The current paper has several contributions on individuals’ news consumption behaviors
on the web. Firstly, it finds that need for cognition and need to evaluate are predictors of
digital news use. The hypothesis that NFC will predict news websites and social media for
political news is rejected, but results indicate that NE is positively associated to news website
use. This implies that individual differences in evaluating may be a stronger motivation to
seeking information actively regarding political information on the web.
Secondly, there is a paucity of studies discriminating pathways to obtain news on the
internet. Most studies focus on the news websites and social media separately, not trying to
distinguish them. The current paper extends the research on news use by categorizing two
pathways using NFC and NE. As NFC and NE are significantly correlated to social
engagement on social media, this paper finds that they are appropriate variables to predict
news consumption on the web.
Ease of access to news online alters the ways we consume news. Some people are eager
to be informed and are willing to seek more information, whereas others are rather passive in
getting news. The current study finds that NFC and NE have the potential to explain
individual differences in digital news usage. Future research should capitalize on this
categorization and may find other potential variables that elaborate the active and passive
news consumption behaviors on the web. Mapping the information seeking process in a more
detailed way is pivotal for explicating the impact of different selections of online news to
readers’ perceptions, knowledge, attitudes and political behaviors.

25

APPENDIX

26

You are being asked to participate a research study of media use patterns. In this online
survey, you will be asked to answer several questions identifying your media use habits and
other personal experience. Please answer sincerely, based on your personal identifications
and experience. I guarantee that your answers will be protected and not be used in any
purposes except for the study. The anonymity of your responses will be ensured. Also, your
answers to these questions will only be accessible to the researchers of the study.
You must be at least 18 years old to participate in this research. Participation in this
research project is completely voluntary. You have the right to say no. You may change your
mind at any time and withdraw. You may choose not to answer specific questions or to stop
participating at any time. Whether you choose to participate or not will have no effect on
your grade or evaluation. You will be compensated by extra credits for participating this
research.
If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant, would
like to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint about this
study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, Heysung Lee, a graduate student in the
department of Communication at Michigan State University, leeheysu@msu.edu.
They survey will take around XX minutes. Please click the following button, to start the
survey.
By clicking on the button below, you indicate your voluntary agreement to participate in this
online survey.

27

Now, we want to ask you about your media use habits. Please answer sincerely based on
your daily life and personal experience.
1. How often do you watch TV to get information about events, public issues and politics?
(Zuniga, Jung & Valenzuela, 2012)
(1) Every day
(2) More than once a week
(3) Once a week
(4) More than once a month
(5) Once a month
(6) Less than once a month
(7) Never
2. How often do you read newspaper to get information about events, public issues and
politics?
1) Every day
2) More than once a week
3) Once a week
4) More than once a month
5) Once a month
6) Less than once a month
7) Never

3. How often do you listen to radio news to get information about events, public issues
and politics?
1) Every day
2) More than once a week
3) Once a week
4) More than once a month
5) Once a month
6) Less than once a month
7) Never
4.

How often do you visit online news websites to get information about events, public
issues and politics?
1) Every day
2) More than once a week
3) Once a week
4) More than once a month
5) Once a month
6) Less than once a month
7) Never

5. What is the name of online news websites that you most frequently to visit to get
information about events, public issues and politics? (open-ended question)
6. How often do you visit social network sites to get information about events, public
issues and politics?
1) Every day

28

2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

More than once a week
Once a week
More than once a month
Once a month
Less than once a month
Never

7. What is the name of social network sites that you most frequently to visit to get
information about events, public issues and politics?
(1) Facebook
(2) Twitter
(3) Instagram
(4) Snapchat
(5) Pinterest
(6) Others (Please Specify; open-ended question)
In your use of social network sites, how often have you done each of the following behavior?
(*Ask only if a respondent answer more than 6 in question ‘SNS’) (Pew Research Center,
2016)
(1) Never
(2) Rarely
(3) Several times a month
(4) Several times a week
(5) Every day or almost every day
8. Read political news headlines or short news summaries.
9. Click a link to other websites and read a political news story
10. Read other users’ comments on political news stories.
11. Comment on political news stories
12. Look at a political photo, video, gif, etc.
13. “Like” political news stories
14. Post links to political news stories by myself
15. Discuss issues in the political news on the timeline
16. How much attention did you pay to news about politics- a great deal, quite a bit, some,
very little, or none? (Price & Zaller, 1993)
1) A great deal
2) Quite a bit
3) Some
4) Very little
5) none

Now, we like to ask you about how you form opinions about issues. For each of the
statements below, please indicate whether or not the statement is characteristic of you or what
you believe (1-doesn’t describe me at all; 7- describes me very well). (Randomized)
17. I would prefer complex to simple problems
18. I would rather do something that requires little thought than something that is sure to
challenge my thinking abilities (reverse-coded)

29

19. I like to have the responsibility of handling a situation that requires a lot of thinking
20. I try to anticipate and avoid situations where there is likely chance I will have to think
in depth about something (reverse-coded)
21. I would prefer a task that is intellectual, difficult, and important to one that is somewhat
important but does not require much thought
22. I feel relief rather than satisfaction after completing a task that required a lot of mental
effort (reverse-coded).
Also, please answer what you think about yourself.
Read each of the following statements and decide how much you agree with each according
to your beliefs and experiences. Please respond according to the following scale. (five-point
scale: 1= extremely uncharacteristic, 2=somewhat uncharacteristic, 3= uncertain, 4=
somewhat characteristic, 5= extremely characteristic)
23. I form opinions about everything
24. It is very important to me hold strong opinions
25. I often prefer to remain neutral about complex issues (reverse-coded)
26. I have many more opinions than the average person

Now, you will be asked to answer general questions about the U.S.
27. What is the most important problem facing the U.S? Please rate top 3 problems. (openended question) (Gallup, 2014)
28. Do you happen to know what job or political office is now held by Paul Ryan?
29. Whose responsibility is it to determine if a law is constitutional or not? Is it the president,
the Congress, or the Supreme Court?
30. How much of a majority is required for the U.S. Senate and House to override a
presidential veto?
31. Do you happen to know which party had the most members in the House of
Representatives in Washington before the upcoming election?
32. Would you say that one of the parties is more conservative than the other at the national
level? Which party is more conservative?
Finally, you are asked to identify basic information about you.
33. What is your age? (open-ended question)
34. What is your gender?
1) Male
2) Female
3) Others
35. What is your race?
1) Caucasian
2) African American
3) Asian
4) Hispanic
5) Others (Please specify)

30

BIBLIOGRAPHY

31

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Kaynar, O., & Fine, A. (2007). The effects of need for cognition on
Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 880–891.
Al-Menayes, J. J. (2015). Motivations for using social media: An Exploratory Factor
Analysis. International Journal of Psychological Studies, 7(1), 43.
Bizer, G. Y., Krosnick, J. A., Holbrook, A. L., Christian Wheeler, S., Rucker, D. D., & Petty,
R. E. (2004). The impact of personality on cognitive, behavioral, and affective political
processes: The effects of Need to Evaluate. Journal of personality, 72(5), 995-1028.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 42(1), 116.
Carpini, M. X. D., & Keeter, S. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things
first. American Journal of Political Science, 1179-1206.
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & Gil de Zuniga, H. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The
intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior,
26(2), 247–253.

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘Friends:’’
Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168.
Erdelez, S. (1999). Information encountering: It's more than just bumping into
information. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 25(3),
26-29.
David, C. C. (2009). Learning political information from the news: A closer look at the role
of motivation. Journal of Communication, 59(2), 243-261.
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Hamburger, Y. A., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2000). The relationship between extraversion and
neuroticism and the different uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(4),
441–449.

Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter vs.
Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Computers in Human
Behavior, 28(2), 561-569.
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological
selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public
Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.

32

Lin, C., Salwen, M. B., & Abdulla, R. A. (2005). Uses and gratifications of online and offline
news: New wine in an old bottle. Online news and the public, 221-236.
Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2002). Online and in the know: Uses and gratifications of the
web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46(1), 54-71.
Kaynar, O., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2008). The effects of need for cognition on Internet
use revisited. Computers in human behavior, 24(2), 361-371.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2015). Choice and preference in media use: advances in selective
exposure theory and research. New York London: Routledge.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way selective exposure to
attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Communication
Research, 36, 426-448.
Lodge, M., & Taber, C. (2000). Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning.
In Lupia, A., McCubbins, M., & Popkin, S. (Eds.), Elements of reason. (183-213). New
York: Cambridge university press.
Martin, R. A. (2007). The psychology of humor: An integrative approach. Burlington, MA:
Elsevier Academic Press.
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public
opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
Nir, L. (2011). Motivated reasoning and public opinion perception. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 75(3), 504-532.
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we
read and how we think.
Price, V., & Zaller, J. (1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception
and their implications for research. Public opinion quarterly, 57(2), 133-164.
Prior, M. (2009). The immensely inflated news audience: Assessing bias in self-reported
news exposure. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(1), 130-143.
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass
communication & society, 3(1), 3-37.
The Pew Research Center. (2011). Why Americans use social media. Retrieved 5 January,
2017, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2011/11/15/why-americans-use-social-media/
The Pew Research Center. (2015). Americans’ internet access. Retrieved 5 January, 2017,
from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/06/26/americans-internet-access-2000-2015/
The Pew Research Center. (2016). Facts about the changing digital news landscape.
Retrieved 5 January, 2017, from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/14/factsabout-the-changing-digital-news-landscape/

33

The Pew Research Center. (2017). How Americans encounter, recall and act upon digital
news. Retrieved 27 February, 2017, from http://www.journalism.org/2017/02/09/howamericans-encounter-recall-and-act-upon-digital-news/
Tewksbury, D., Weaver, A. J. & Maddex, B. D. (2001). Accidentally informed: Incidental
news exposure on the World Wide Web. Journalism and Mass Communication
Quarterly, 78 (3), 533.
Tewksbury, D., Hals, M. L., & Bibart, A. (2008). The efficacy of news browsing: The
relationship of news consumption style to social and political efficacy. Journalism and
Mass Communication Quarterly, 85(2), 257-272
Tuten, T. L., & Bosnjak, M. (2001). Understanding differences in web usage: The role of
need for cognition and the five factor model of personality. Social Behavior and
Personality: an international journal, 29(4), 391-398.
Zhong, B., Hardin, M., & Sun, T. (2011). Less effortful thinking leads to more social
networking? The associations between the use of social network sites and personality
traits. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1265-1271.

34